Hi Sledge, sledge hammer wrote: > Hi, > > I had a crazy thought today. Why not wikify the docs? Why > you ask? Well, the docs aren't complete and many functions need more > documentation or code examples. Moreover, as I have been using the > online docs for almost a year now I have noticed some problems. Such > as(but not limited to): > 1. Most of the enums don't have documentation. A reader needs to open the > gtk+ docs and find the corresponding documentation. > 2. > There are some function-documentation that tries to link to soming else > that doesn't exist. This obviously occurs from the automatic generation > of the docs. This "problem" is somewhat rare, but exists. > 3. Many function-doc is just copy&pasted from the gtk+ docs but doesn't > correspond 100% to the C++ bindings > 4. Quite a few minor typos > 5. Quite a few functions don't have documentation just because the their name > documentes them(eg Gtk::Widget::show()) > 6. > Signals often don't have a documentation or they have a poor one. > Almost always they don't tell when they are emited or what they mean etc
Yes, i'm not sure if a wiki is a great solution, i've always liked the way the PHP documentation works: user comments on the api reference... I guess the problem with this is that the pages are generated from the source. But maybe that stuff can be smarted up in such a way that it retains existing comments or something. Thanks, --Bert _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
